Method of separating and distributing oxygen

- Vbox, Incorporated

Disclosed is a method of providing oxygen rich gas. Oxygen is separated from ambient air with an oxygen separator in discrete pulses, one pulse at a time. The start of the pulse is synchronized with the beginning of an inhalation of a person. The oxygen rich gas in each pulse is separated from the ambient air in real time during a nitrogen adsorption step concurrent with each inhalation.

Skip to: Description  ·  Claims  ·  References Cited  · Patent History  ·  Patent History
Description
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

Reference is made to the following pending applications: U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/839,973, entitled “APPARATUS FOR SEPARATING OXYGEN FROM AMBIENT AIR” as filed on Jul. 20, 2010, and claims priority to U.S. Provisional Pat. App. Ser. No. 61/227,545, entitled “APPARATUS FOR SEPARATING OXYGEN FROM AMBIENT AIR” filed Jul. 22, 2009, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.

BACKGROUND

The present disclosure relates to an adsorption based gas separation apparatus that separates oxygen from ambient air with beneficial improvements over the prior art in size, weight and energy consumed per unit of oxygen separated from air.

Pressure swing separation systems are known to offer the best energy efficiency for oxygen separation at small production rates. Systems using the Skarstrom PSA cycle (described in Pressure Swing Adsorption by Douglas M. Ruthven et al., John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1994, hereinby incorporated by reference, Section 3.2.1) for medical oxygen production are common examples of these small scale systems and are familiar to those skilled in the art. These systems are known to consume about 350 watts of electrical power to produce about 5 liters per minute of oxygen with about 90% purity.

The portable concentrators are battery powered to eliminate tethering utility cords and similar power supply structures attached to the apparatus. Research efforts were directed toward energy efficiency of the separation process. As previously noted, pressure swing separation systems are known to offer the best energy efficiency for oxygen separation at small production rates. Prior art oxygen separators were measured, and the performance and behavior of one of these commonly used systems was analyzed—the currently popular Invacare model IRC5LX (specifications available from www.invacare.com). In this device, an electrically driven pneumatic compressor cycled air from 1 to 3 atmospheres pressure, following the Skarstrom cycle steps, through two columnar containers of adsorbent having high adsorption capacity for nitrogen and other polar molecules. By measuring the pneumatic power of the pumped gas stream including the power associated with the adiabatic heating of the pumped gas and comparing that to the electrical power input to the pump, it was determined that much energy was being lost to pump inefficiency. This finding was set aside, and research was focused on exploring the power consumption aspects of the separation cycle steps.

There is a specific amount of theoretical power associated with pumping a stream of gas through a given pressure difference as is required to operate a pressure swing separation system. For example: (1 Liters/Minute flow rate)×(1 Atmosphere pressure rise)=0.592 watts of power. Adiabatic heating of this gas stream consumes additional power in watts. Reducing the pressure change or the flow rate of the pumped gas stream needed to drive the separation cycle steps would therefore directly reduce the power required to produce a given amount of oxygen. Research and testing was done to determine the minimum pump pressure and flow rates to produce a given oxygen separation rate.

SUMMARY

Disclosed is a method of providing oxygen rich gas. Oxygen is separated from ambient air with an oxygen separator in discrete pulses, one pulse at a time. The start of the pulse is synchronized with the beginning of an inhalation of a person. The oxygen rich gas in each pulse is separated from the ambient air in real time during a nitrogen adsportion step concurrent with each inhalation.

In another embodiment, a delivery system for oxygen separated from ambient air is disclosed. The delivery system has a separator with at least one separation column, the separation column containing an inlet at a first end and an outlet at a second end, a buffer column having a single inlet at a first end, a vacuum pump, and a valve system that connects the vacuum pump with the separation column. The delivery system also has a nose cannula. The oxygen separator is capable of separating oxygen from air in discrete pulses in response to inhalation by a person through the nose cannula.

In yet another embodiment, a delivery system for oxygen separated from ambient air is disclosed. The delivery system has a separator with at least one separation column, the separation column containing an inlet at a first end and an outlet at a second end, a buffer column having a single inlet at a first end, a vacuum pump, and a valve system that connects the vacuum pump with the separation column and connects the separation column and buffer column. The delivery system also has a nose cannula. The oxygen separator is capable of separating oxygen from air in discrete pulses in response to inhalation by a person through the nose cannula, and the oxygen separator utilizes the buffer column containing the single inlet on the first end of the column for controlling flow in and out of the buffer column, functioning as a last in/first out (LIFO) buffer for the purity of a separated gas flowing in and out of the inlet port.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a schematic view of an oxygen separator utilizing a single adsorption column.

FIG. 2 is a graph of the isotherms of two adsorbents.

FIG. 3 is a schematic view of an oxygen separator utilizing three identical adsorption columns.

FIG. 4 is a schematic view of an oxygen separator utilizing two adsorption columns with a last in/first out buffer column.

 DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The separation apparatus described herein was developed for use in an oxygen concentrator that provides portable supplementary oxygen to patients with lowered blood oxygen levels. The concentrator is much lighter, smaller and more energy efficient than prior art devices, and is small enough so that the apparatus can be conveniently worn by a patient as they move about rather than wheeled on a cart or carried like a piece of luggage. The separation components contributed directly to the unique portability features of the concentrator. The apparatus can be scaled in size for higher or lower oxygen separation rates using the unique design features to provide reduced size, weight and power benefits for other applications. Configurations that used one, two and three adsorption columns all using the same separation cycle steps were built and tested.

Research began by exploring the minimum pump pressure and flow rates with a simple form of pressure swing separation system. The physical model in FIG. 1 was constructed and connected instrumentation to accurately measure gas pressures, flow rates and compositions as it cycled through a sequence of separation steps. In FIG. 1, 100 is a 1 inch (2.54 cm) diameter by 4 inch (10.16 cm) long cylinder (or column) packed with adsorbent beads. Ambient air at approximately 1 atmosphere (101 kPa) can flow into 100 at the feed end adjacent monitoring point 101 by way of solenoid valve 110 from port 120. Waste gas can be pumped from 100 at feed end 101 through valve 111 by vacuum pump 150 and vented to atmosphere through port 121. A gas stream reduced in nitrogen can be pumped from 100 at product end 102 through check valve 112 by pump 151 and transferred to accumulator 160. The components in boxes 200 and 250 were not present during these first tests. Monitoring points 101 through 105 are locales where instrumentation was attached to monitor pressure, flow, and composition of the gas streams as the gas streams varied during cycle steps. Customized instrumentation was developed that had a pressure response time of less than 1 millisecond, a flow rate response time of 10 milliseconds, and a composition response time of less than 750 milliseconds. The customized instrumentation fed a digital storage oscilloscope that could capture time variant measures of the parameters. The instrumentation proved crucial to measuring and understanding the detailed behavior of the experimental configurations.

The adsorbent materials useful for oxygen separation have an adsorption capacity for nitrogen that is higher than the adsorption capacity for oxygen over a pressure range of several atmospheres. These adsorbent materials are characterized by their isotherms. Isotherms are graphs showing the amount of gas contained in a given mass of adsorbent material as a function of pressure at a fixed temperature. The isotherms for nitrogen and oxygen are of primary interest. Air is nearly 1% argon. The argon isotherms for these adsorbents are nearly identical to the oxygen isotherms so the separation steps discussed here relate to oxygen and argon as though they were the same. These isotherms for two different adsorbents are shown in FIG. 2.

The type 13X adsorbent is commonly used in small oxygen concentrators such as the Invacare device that was tested. Another available adsorbent type is LiLSX. Isotherms of LiLSX are plotted in FIG. 2 with the 13X isotherms for comparison. As shown in FIG. 2, the ratio of nitrogen capacity to oxygen capacity is much higher for the LiLSX than the 13X at 2 atmospheres pressure and below. The difference of the adsorbents is even more pronounced at 1 atmosphere and below where the absolute nitrogen capacity of the LiLSX is seen to be much higher than the 13X while the oxygen capacities are similar between the two.

Thus, it was determined that using the LiLSX adsorbent could provide energy savings over adsorbents such as 13X with lesser nitrogen to oxygen capacity ratios. Any pressure driven oxygen separation sequence for separating oxygen from air must include the minimum steps of increasing the pressure of an air stream while passing it through the adsorbent to adsorb nitrogen, followed by decreasing the pressure to desorb the nitrogen from the adsorbent and carry it away in a waste gas stream. The amount of oxygen that can be separated from the air stream in one cycle increases with increased amounts of nitrogen that can be adsorbed from that air stream. The nitrogen isotherms indicate the amount of nitrogen that is adsorbed for a given pressure change. The higher the slope of the nitrogen isotherm curve, the less pressure change is required to change the amount of nitrogen adsorbed by a given mass of adsorbent. In FIG. 2, to change the amount of nitrogen held in a mass of 13X adsorbent by the amount N1, a pressure change P1 is required. With the LiLSX adsorbent, an amount of nitrogen N2 in the figure required pressure change P2. N2 is approximately equal to N1, but P2 is only about ⅓ the pressure change of P1.

In a portable concentrator, pump 151 is providing the pneumatic power to produce this pressure change. As described, pressure difference across the pump linearly affects the pumping power input. Operating over a pressure range that spans a steep segment of the nitrogen isotherm could allow a given volume of nitrogen to be cyclically adsorbed and desorbed with relatively less power provided by the pump. In FIG. 2, the oxygen isotherms for the two adsorbents are more similar but the 13X oxygen isotherm shows much more oxygen being adsorbed over the larger P1 pressure range than the LiLSX oxygen isotherm over the smaller P2 pressure range. More oxygen will be adsorbed during the high pressure nitrogen adsorbing steps using the 13 X adsorbent than in the low pressure steps using the LiLSX adsorbent. The adsorbed oxygen subtracts directly from the amount of product oxygen that can be produced. Using these two effects in combination, more oxygen should be produced from the same amount of nitrogen pumped over a smaller pressure range in a system using the LiLSX adsorbent than from one using 13X. Utilizing LiLSX adsorbent in a portable concentrator system will greatly reduce the pneumatic energy required to separate a given volume of oxygen.

The behavior of the LiLSX adsorbent (OXYSIV MDX from UOP LLC) was explored in the steep section of its nitrogen isotherm in pressure ranges from 1 atmosphere (101 kPa) and below using the simplified test system of FIG. 1 without blocks 200 or 250. The system is commonly referred to as a vacuum swing type system. The initial cycle steps considered were:

1. Evacuate the column 100 through the feed end adjacent point 101 to a vacuum level V measured by a pressure sensor at point 102.

2. Pressurize the column to 1 atmosphere with air through the feed end.

3. Feed air through the feed end at near 1 atmosphere pressure at a constant flow rate while pumping oxygen rich gas out the product end 102 into the accumulator 160.

The process is similar to the vacuum swing cycle from Ruthven et al., Section 3.2.4. An abrupt increase in the gas flow rate from the product end of the column measured by a flow sensor at point 103 during step 3 marked the completion of nitrogen adsorption in the column and the end of step 3. At that point in time, the entire column was at equilibrium with atmospheric nitrogen partial pressure of about 0.78 atmospheres (79 kPa) and oxygen (including about 1% argon) at 0.22 atmospheres (22 kPa). The cycle repeats with step 1 resetting the nitrogen equilibrium in the column to a lower level according to the end vacuum level V. The low oxygen partial pressure throughout the entire column at the end of step 3 left very little oxygen to be lost to the waste stream during step 1.

By measuring the performance of this test system, how vacuum level V affected the ratio of power consumed to oxygen produced by this cycle was determined. Rather than considering the oxygen produced, the system was viewed as nitrogen eliminated from the product stream. As the vacuum level V in step 1 was decreased (absolute pressure lowered) the amount of nitrogen removed from the product stream during step 3 increased at an increasing rate for each additional decrement of V as predicted by the nonlinear increasing slope of the nitrogen isotherm. Oxygen adsorption also occurred according to the oxygen isotherm. Oxygen was then lost in the waste stream during step 1 as it was desorbed during the evacuation of the column. However, the oxygen isotherm is nearly linear so there was a linear increase in the amount of lost oxygen with decreased V while the amount of nitrogen removed increased at an increasing rate. Stronger end vacuums therefore increased oxygen produced, due to larger volumes of adsorbed nitrogen, at an increasing rate.

Another important performance factor is the purity of the product oxygen stream and how it was affected by V. Industry standards required a design to produce oxygen with a purity of 86% or higher. The product purity increased with reduced V (stronger vacuum). Thus, the evacuate step 1 had to reduce the nitrogen partial pressure in the column to less than 0.08 atmosphere (8.1 kPa) to produce the necessary oxygen purity from the feed step 3 that would follow.

Strong vacuums, including those below 0.1 atmosphere (10 kPa) present problems when considering the practical characteristics of vacuum pumps. The volumetric efficiency of positive displacement vacuum pumps decreases in proportion to the vacuum level being pumped. For example, at 0.1 atmospheres (10 kPa) an ideal pump is only capable of 10% of its volumetric pumping capacity. In practice, even this greatly reduced capacity cannot be realized due to some small volume remaining in the displacement space at the end of a compression stroke in the pump. For example, if this remaining volume were greater than 10% of the pump displacement stroke the pump would have entirely stopped pumping before reaching the 0.1 atmosphere (10 kPa) end vacuum. Because of this problem, requirements for oxygen purity and production rates could not be satisfied with an existing vacuum pump small enough to be compatible with portability goals if the pump had to operate at low vacuum. The evacuate step took so much of the cycle time as it approached the low end vacuum V that the resulting oxygen production rate became too slow.

Experiments with modifications to these simple separation steps were performed, trying to obtain a result that could produce 86% oxygen purity with weaker (higher pressure) vacuum levels. The product oxygen has a very low nitrogen partial pressure. Feeding the product oxygen into the product end of the column during pressurize step 2 instead of air into the feed end should lower the equilibrium pressure for nitrogen in the product end causing nitrogen to be desorbed from the product end and swept toward the feed end of the column. No nitrogen is removed from the column by this step because the feed end is closed. Nitrogen is just reorganized leaving less nitrogen adsorbed toward the product end and more toward the feed end. During the feed step that follows, more of the nitrogen in the product gas stream will be adsorbed as it passes through the product end of the column due to the nitrogen equilibrium having been set to a lower pressure by the oxygen pressurization. Higher product purity is obtained.

The aforementioned step was added to the test apparatus by adding the components and connections in box 200 of FIG. 1. Testing proved that oxygen could then be produced with the desired purity using an end vacuum level as high as 0.3 atmospheres (30 kPa). The column was being evacuated to 0.3 atmospheres (30 kPa) much faster than it was able to evacuate to the original 0.1 atmospheres (10 kPa). A more practical vacuum pump with a weaker end vacuum could now be used to power the cycle. However, significant additional time was now being spent due to a longer feed step that recycled the oxygen used to pressurize the column back into the product oxygen accumulator. The oxygen was being passed between accumulator 160 and the column in steps 2 and 3 consuming extra cycle time. The system increased product oxygen purity but did not produce additional oxygen product. The effective oxygen production rate was reduced. Further experimentation revealed that by only partially pressurized the column to about 0.6 atmospheres (61 kPa) with product oxygen through block 200 followed by rapidly pressurizing of the column the rest of the way to 1 atmosphere (101 kPa) with air at the feed end through valve 110, the system produces the same amount of oxygen and purity as with total pressurization by oxygen. The modified system saves time in the cycle with less pressurization oxygen to be passed between the accumulator and the column.

The system with the improved version of the cycle was tested with the addition of product oxygen fed into the product end of the column while the column was being evacuated through the feed end. The addition of product oxygen into the feed end is done in the prior art to improve product purity in pressure swing (above 1 atmosphere (101 kPa)) systems using the Skarstrom cycle. When the improved system was tested, no beneficial results were discerned. From the results, the following were postulated: When a stream of air was fed through the modified adsorbent column previously equilibrated at a lower partial pressure for nitrogen according to the level of V, a sharp dividing line called the mass transfer zone (MTZ) developed and propagated through the column in the direction of gas flow. The MTZ was undetectable by the test setup and the attached instrumentation. The MTZ sharply segregated the gas compositions in the column with the feed air gas composition on the feed side of the zone and the product gas composition on the product side of the zone. The nitrogen was being adsorbed within the narrow MTZ leaving the gas down stream of the MTZ partially stripped of nitrogen. Unfortunately, the process could not be performed in reverse with the same distinct segregation between the gas compositions. In the reverse process, oxygen rich product gas would be fed into the product end of the column while evacuating nitrogen rich gas out the feed end. The reverse process did cause a mass transfer as nitrogen was desorbed from the column, but the mass transfer was not confined to a narrow zone. The reverse mass transfer zone was broadly dispersed throughout the column and immeasurable as a result of the shape and nonlinearity of the nitrogen isotherm curve compared to the oxygen isotherm (Ruthven et al., Section 2.4.1). With no narrow zone separating the product oxygen from the nitrogen rich gas in the column, the oxygen is diffusing and much of the oxygen is swept to the feed end by the nitrogen rich gas flow and is lost to the waste stream during the evacuation step. The loss of product oxygen was determined to likely be offsetting any possible gains in the amount or purity of product oxygen being separated in the tested system.

The use of this last process step was abandoned. The result was a process that separated product oxygen with adequate purity within a relatively small absolute pressure range of 0.3 to 1 atmosphere. This would significantly reduce pumping power over that of typical pressure swing cycles operating in a higher pressure span well above 1 atmosphere. By running the feed step until the mass transfer zone was close to breakthrough at the product end of the column, little product oxygen in the column is left to be lost during the evacuation step. These factors produced the most product oxygen volume from the feed step for the volume of gas pumped from the column during the evacuate step. Minimizing both the pressure range and the volume of gas to be pumped for a given amount of oxygen produced, in this way, required a uniquely small amount of pneumatic power from the pump to drive the separation steps.

Another apparatus, shown in FIG. 3, was built to test physical scale implementations of the aforementioned separation cycle. In FIG. 3 the components 100 through 200 are included and perform the same steps in the same way as in FIG. 1 copied three times labeled 100A-100C through 200A-200C. The cycle steps were grouped into a sequence of three equal time intervals forming a three phase cycle. The first phase evacuated the column from 1 atmosphere (101 kPa) to 0.3 atmospheres (30 kPa) through the feed end. The second phase pressurized the column to 0.6 atmospheres (61 kPa) with product oxygen through the product end, and then pressurized the column to 1 atmosphere (101 kPa) with air through the feed end. The third phase fed air at 1 atmosphere (101 kPa) through the feed end and vented product oxygen from the product end. Three columns were connected with tubing, valves and a vacuum pump so that each column cycled through these three phases. Each column was offset in time from the other two by one phase step. This way, at any instant in time, there was always one column being evacuated allowing the pump to run continuously allowing full use of the available pumping capacity. One column was always venting product oxygen providing a somewhat continuous oxygen stream. The configuration was implemented and tested for oxygen production volume and purity with a variety of different valve schemes. Sequencer controlled electric solenoid valves, motor driven rotary valves, and pressure driven poppet valves in various combinations were tested. All tested valves worked to produce the desired cycle steps, but there was a reduction in the purity and quantity of product oxygen produced by one of the examples. Determining the cause of the reduced performance in the one flawed version led to the eventual understanding of the problem, which led to an important improvement in the cycle steps.

During the pressurize phase for each column, oxygen was fed into the product end of that column bringing the pressure to about 0.6 atmosphere (61 kPa). The oxygen was being produced by one of the other two columns during its feed phase offset in time to be concurrent with the column being pressurized. For example, column 100A in its feed phase would pass oxygen to 100B in its concurrent pressurize phase to pressurize it through 200A. Roughly half of the oxygen volume transferred from the column in the feed phase is used to pressurize the other column. The remaining half of the oxygen from the column in the feed phase is removed as product by pump 151 through the check valves into the accumulator 160. The earliest half of the oxygen stream out of the feed column was used to pressurize the other column. These and the single column in FIG. 1 all performed well. However, due to a small difference in its valve scheme, the poorly performing implementation happened to be using the last half of this oxygen stream rather than the first half to pressurize the other column. The later part of the stream was slightly less pure than the first part. This seemingly small difference was determined to be the cause of the significant performance reduction of that implementation. Correcting this to use the first half of the product stream for pressurization eliminated the performance deficit thus proving the effect.

As disclosed, the system was able to beneficially increase the end pressure of the evacuate step and still maintain purity of the product by partially pressurizing the evacuated column with product oxygen. The partial pressure of nitrogen in the product end of the column after the phase 2 pressurization steps sets the partial pressure for nitrogen in the beginning of the phase 3 oxygen stream due to equilibrium between the gas stream and the adsorbent. Nitrogen is adsorbed in the column as the product stream flows and some of the nitrogen is being adsorbed in the product end. As nitrogen is adsorbed the equilibrium point for nitrogen in the product stream moves toward progressively higher partial pressures causing a gradual rise in the nitrogen content of the product stream above the initial level as the feed progresses toward breakthrough of the mass transfer zone. Establishing a lower equilibrium level for nitrogen at the product end of the column therefore lowers the nitrogen level of the entire product stream due to its lower initial level. This is set by the nitrogen partial pressure of the last pressurizing gas to pass through the product end of the column being pressurized. The first part of the oxygen rich stream out of that column during the next feed step therefore has the least nitrogen and the last out has the most. When used to pressurize a column, for best performance, the more pure first oxygen out of the feeding column should be the last gas into the column being pressurized. That means the product gas stream should be buffered and its entire composition order reversed before being used to pressurize a column. The configurations that had worked best during tests did not reverse the entire order of the gas stream, but at least was a step in the right direction since the system used the first approximate half of the product stream to pressurize rather than the last half as with the configuration that performed poorly.

A way to implement a last in first out buffer for the product gas was discovered that could be used to perform the order reversal. An additional column filled with LiLSX adsorbent having only a single port at one end was utilized. As gas flowed into this buffer column, oxygen was least adsorbed and traveled the farthest down the column. Nitrogen was strongly adsorbed and was captured by the adsorbent closest to the inlet. As gas was removed from this column, the nitrogen close to the inlet (now acting as an outlet) flowed out early due to its proximity to the outlet and the desorbing effect of the lower nitrogen content gas flowing behind it from farther into the column. The benefit of this last in/first out (LIFO) gas buffer was tested on the separation cycle by first integrating the LIFO into the earlier single column test apparatus of FIG. 1. Block 200 was removed from FIG. 1 and replaced it with block 250. This includes LIFO column 251 equal in volume to separation column 100. Also, valve 252 provided a controllable connection between the LIFO and the product end 102 of the separation column 100.

The test apparatus was modified to revisit and more thoroughly explore different combinations of product gas feed rates, timing, and pressures fed into the product end of the column during the evacuate step. It was expected that there should be some (probably small) amount of product oxygen gas that, if controlled carefully, should also help reduce the partial pressure of nitrogen toward the product end of the column before the oxygen in that gas had time to diffuse to the feed end and be wasted during evacuate. This was tested through variable flow restrictor 254 with timing controlled by valve 253 linking the product end of 100 to the LIFO 251.

The test apparatus valves were controlled to performed the following sequence of steps:

1. Begin evacuating the column through the feed end 101.

2. At an adjustable evacuate pressure threshold, measured at 102, begin an adjustable low flow rate of product oxygen into the product end 102 from the LIFO 251 through valve 253 and restrictor 254.

3. Stop evacuating and continue to flow product oxygen more rapidly by opening valve 252 from the LIFO into the product end pressurizing the column to an adjustable level measured at 102.

4. Finish pressurizing the column with air through the feed end 101 to ambient atmosphere.

5. Feed air into the feed end of the column 101 through 110 while pulling oxygen out of the product end 102 to refill the LIFO 251 through 252 until it is at 1 atmosphere pressure.

6. Continue feeding air and removing product oxygen from the product end of the column through 112 and pump 151 into the accumulator 160 until the mass transfer zone is near breakthrough.

A process to discover the best combination of pressure, flow, and timing settings during steps 2 and 3 was performed. The best combination was found to include a very low oxygen flow rate into the product end of the column from the LIFO during only the last part of the evacuate step. The specific flows and pressures are specific to the size and shape of the separation column and need to be found experimentally for different column geometries.

The first gas out of the LIFO that fed into the product end of the column toward the end of evacuate during step 2 had the highest nitrogen content. The last gas out of the LIFO entered the column at the end of the pressurization during step 3 and had the lowest nitrogen content. This resulted in the column, at the end of pressurization step 4, continuously ordered with nitrogen partial pressure equilibriums highest at the feed end of the column and very low at the product end. Oxygen partial pressures were ordered in the opposite direction so the sum of the two partial pressures was 1 atmosphere (101 kPa) throughout the column. With this, oxygen purity 86% and higher were obtained with end vacuums as high as 0.5 atmospheres (51 kPa). This is a vacuum swing of only 0.5 atmospheres (51 kPa) compared to a pressure swing of 2 atmospheres (203 kPa) for the typical Skarstrom PSA cycle. A very significant reduction in pneumatic power resulted. Also, the relatively weak vacuums can be achieved rapidly by a smaller and more practical vacuum pump thus shortening the evacuate step and the total cycle time for a given amount of oxygen produced.

Using these separation cycle steps, the design shown in FIG. 4 was constructed for a portable oxygen concentrator. The portable system is configured with two separation columns 400 and 401 to allow some overlapping of concurrent cycle steps, and one LIFO buffer 402 that was shared during the cycle steps occurring in the two columns.

In FIG. 4 cycle step 1 is first performed on column 400. With valves 410 and 411 positioned as illustrated, variable rate vacuum pump 420 evacuates column 400 from the feed end pulling gas through valves 410 and 411 then passing the gas from pump 420 back through valve 411 as shown and out port 430 to atmosphere. Valves 413, 415, and 417 are closed.

Step 2 begins on column 400 when the vacuum level in column 400 reaches a selected threshold measured at monitoring point 440. Valve with flow restrictor 415 is opened to establish a controlled flow of oxygen rich gas from the LIFO 402 into the product end of column 400 while the evacuation of column 400 that began in step 1 continues. Step 2 is ended after a selected amount of time.

Step 3 begins on column 400 with valve 411 switched to the opposite state halting evacuate of column 400. Valve 413 is opened allowing a more rapid flow of oxygen from the LIFO 402 into column 400 pressurizing it to about 0.6 atmospheres (61 kPa).

Step 4 begins with valve 410 switched to the opposite state providing a path for ambient air through port 430, check valve 412 and valve 410 into the feed end of column 400 pressurizing it to 1 atmosphere (101 kPa). Valves 413, 415, and 417 are all closed during step 4.

Step 5 refills LIFO 402, which was left at a partial vacuum after transferring gas to pressurize column 400 in step 3. Valve 413 is opened drawing oxygen rich gas from column 400 into LIFO 402 until it reaches 1 atmosphere (101 kPa). Column 400 remains at 1 atmosphere (101 kPa) throughout this step with the path to its feed end still open to ambient air as in step 4. All activity is stopped after step 5 waiting for a patient with a nose cannula (not illustrated) connected to port 431 to begin a breath inhalation.

Step 6 begins when the patient inhales with valves 413 and 415 closed and 410 and 411 in the opposite state shown. The vacuum pump 420 starts immediately drawing air from ambient at port 430, through valve 411 and into the inlet of pump 420. That air is pumped through vacuum pump 420 and back through the other path in valve 411, through valve 410 and into the feed end of column 400. The pressure in column 400 is slightly raised in this way until it is sufficient to open check valve 417 and vent product oxygen out of port 431 to the nose cannula worn by the patient. Vacuum pump 420 is controlled in its flow rate and pumping duration to deliver a pulse of oxygen rich gas to the patient that is shaped in its flow rate and duration.

The steps outlined above are performed on column 400 or on 401 selected by the state of valve 410. This toggles from one column to the other every patient inhalation. Some cycle steps are overlapped and performed concurrently on the two columns to save cycle time and to be able to keep up with a rapid breathing rate.

The portable oxygen concentrator using this separation apparatus delivers oxygen to a patient in pulses that are synchronized with the beginning of their breath inhalation. This eliminates the waste of oxygen and associated energy that occurs during a patient's exhalation or breath hold. The separation cycle is well suited to that requirement. In one embodiment, the cycle is stopped and held at the end of each pressurization step until the patient's inhalation began. The second half of the feed step is then rapidly completed producing product oxygen within about 0.4 seconds with a small pressure rise above 1 atmosphere (101 kPa), just enough to pressurize the product oxygen to induce flow through a short breathing cannula. While the patient continues through the breathing cycle sequence of inhalation, exhalation, and breath hold, the next separation cycle steps are being performed, through pressurization, and again held waiting for the next inhalation. There is no need for any added oxygen storage or dispensing components. Oxygen is separated and dispensed directly from the separation column, in real time, through the cannula to the patient. All activity involved in the separation cycle, including operation of the pump, is halted while waiting for the next inhalation. This provides additional energy savings, important in the portable application.

The oxygen flow pulses need to be variable in volume to match the specific needs of each patient. This separation cycle is suited to that requirement. The amount of oxygen produced in one feed step of the cycle is variable in accordance with the end vacuum level. Lower end evacuate pressures produced larger volumes of oxygen during each feed. Higher end vacuums produced smaller volumes while the oxygen pressurization of the columns from the LIFO buffer maintained adequate oxygen purity by always keeping the product end of the columns at a low nitrogen partial pressure. Higher end evacuate pressures require less pump energy and allowed faster evacuations and a greater fraction of time spent with the cycle on hold. This produces energy savings when reduced oxygen volumes are selected.

Minimizing the work load on the pump in these ways reduces the peak pumping requirements and therefore generally reduces the size and weight of the vacuum pump. Using an adsorbent with a steep nitrogen isotherm and cycling it below 1 atmosphere where it is the steepest allows adsorbent columns with less size and weight for a given nitrogen capacity. Smaller than normal amounts of oxygen are lost to the waste stream during the evacuate step due in combination to the low oxygen adsorption capacity of the adsorbent in the vacuum range, the cycle that passes little oxygen from the product end to the waste stream of the column during evacuate, and little oxygen left in the column at the end of feed due to operation near breakthrough of the mass transfer zone. This all contributes to a high oxygen recovery rate for the cycle and therefore less waste stream flow created for a given oxygen product flow. Smaller scale pump, valves, and connecting components can be used to handle this reduced evacuated waste stream.

A portable medical oxygen concentrator using this separation apparatus with a custom designed high efficiency vacuum pump separates oxygen while consuming 12.7 watts per liter per minute of 88% pure oxygen. The portable concentrator weighs 2.5 pounds per liter per minute fully packaged. For comparison, the Invacare concentrator that was tested and utilizes the Skarstrom pressure swing cycle consumed 70 watts per liter per minute and weighs 10.4 pounds per liter per minute.

In one embodiment, a pressure in the desorption steps is increased in variable amounts relative to the pressure of the adsorption steps to reduce in variable amounts the volume of oxygen rich gas produced during the adsorption steps. In another embodiment, a higher pressure nitrogen adsorption step that separates the oxygen rich gas from the feed air is performed concurrent with the beginning of inhalation that is followed by nitrogen desorption with reduced pressure and repressurization steps that are performed during the remainder of the breathing cycle of the person.

While the invention has been described with reference to an exemplary embodiment(s), it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes may be made and equivalents may be substituted for elements thereof without departing from the scope of the invention. In addition, many modifications may be made to adapt a particular situation or material to the teachings of the invention without departing from the essential scope thereof. Therefore, it is intended that the invention not be limited to the particular embodiment(s) disclosed, but that the invention will include all embodiments falling within the scope of the appended claims.

Claims

1. A method of providing oxygen rich gas, the method comprising:

separating oxygen from ambient air with an oxygen separator in discrete pulses, one pulse at a time, wherein separating oxygen from ambient air comprises:
1) evacuating a separation column to a first pressure through a feed end of a column;
2) metering a flow of gas from a last in/first out (LIFO) buffer column into a product end of the separation column while continuing to evacuate the separation column to a second pressure;
3) stopping evacuation of the separation column while continuing the flow of gas from the LIFO buffer column at a second flow rate until a third pressure is reached in the separation column;
4) pressurizing the separation column with ambient air through the feed end to a pressure of about 1 atm; and
5) feeding air into the feed end of the column while drawing an oxygen rich gas from the product end of the separation column; and
6) repeating steps 1 through 5;
wherein the start of the pulse is synchronized with the beginning of an inhalation of a person; and
wherein the oxygen rich gas in each pulse is separated from the ambient air in real time during a nitrogen adsorption step concurrent with each inhalation.

2. The method of claim 1 wherein the pulses are delivered to a person through a nose cannula.

3. The method of claim 1 wherein each pulse of the discrete pulses is produced by a sequence of nitrogen adsorption and desorption steps driven by pressure variations such that each pass through the sequence of steps produces one oxygen pulse.

4. The method of claim 3 wherein an adsorbent column size of the oxygen separator is chosen to adsorb enough nitrogen during each pulse so that a desired maximum oxygen volume for each pulse is produced.

5. The method of claim 3 wherein a pressure in the nitrogen desorption steps is increased in variable amounts relative to a pressure of the nitrogen adsorption steps to reduce in variable amounts the volume of oxygen rich gas produced during the nitrogen adsorption steps.

6. The method of claim 5 wherein a higher pressure nitrogen adsorption step that separates the oxygen rich gas from the feed air is performed concurrent with the beginning of inhalation that is followed by a nitrogen desorption step with reduced pressure and repressurization steps that are performed during the remainder of the breathing cycle of the person.

7. The method of claim 6 wherein after the nitrogen desorption with reduced pressure and repressurization steps and before the beginning of the next inhalation, all separation activity by the oxygen separator is stopped.

Referenced Cited
U.S. Patent Documents
3121625 February 1964 Broughton
3236028 February 1966 Rutan
3717974 February 1973 Batta
3880616 April 1975 Myers et al.
3922149 November 1975 Ruder et al.
4169715 October 2, 1979 Eriksson
4194890 March 25, 1980 McCombs et al.
4222750 September 16, 1980 Gauthier et al.
4263018 April 21, 1981 McCombs et al.
4354859 October 19, 1982 Keller, II et al.
4386945 June 7, 1983 Gardner
4448592 May 15, 1984 Linde
4449990 May 22, 1984 Tedford, Jr.
4472177 September 18, 1984 Sircar
4491459 January 1, 1985 Pinkerton
4502873 March 5, 1985 Mottram et al.
4576616 March 18, 1986 Mottram et al.
4627860 December 9, 1986 Rowland
4648395 March 10, 1987 Sato et al.
4648888 March 10, 1987 Rowland
4673415 June 16, 1987 Stanford
4681099 July 21, 1987 Sato et al.
4684377 August 4, 1987 Haruna et al.
4702903 October 27, 1987 Keefer
4801308 January 31, 1989 Keefer
4802899 February 7, 1989 Vrana et al.
4813977 March 21, 1989 Schmidt et al.
4816121 March 28, 1989 Keefer
4826510 May 2, 1989 McCombs
4880443 November 14, 1989 Miller et al.
4892566 January 9, 1990 Bansal et al.
4925464 May 15, 1990 Rabenau et al.
4948401 August 14, 1990 Izumi et al.
4968329 November 6, 1990 Keefer
4971609 November 20, 1990 Pawlos
4973339 November 27, 1990 Bansal
5002591 March 26, 1991 Stanford
5034023 July 23, 1991 Thompson
5069688 December 3, 1991 Wells
5071449 December 10, 1991 Sircar
5082473 January 21, 1992 Keefer
5084075 January 28, 1992 Sircar
5096469 March 17, 1992 Keefer
5112367 May 12, 1992 Hill
5114440 May 19, 1992 Reiss
5169506 December 8, 1992 Michaels
5186793 February 16, 1993 Michaels
5228840 July 20, 1993 Swank
5247826 September 28, 1993 Frola et al.
5256172 October 26, 1993 Keefer
5268021 December 7, 1993 Hill et al.
5340381 August 23, 1994 Vorih
5366541 November 22, 1994 Hill et al.
5370112 December 6, 1994 Perkins
5415683 May 16, 1995 Leavitt
5429666 July 4, 1995 Agrawal et al.
RE35099 November 28, 1995 Hill
5469372 November 21, 1995 McBrearty et al.
5474595 December 12, 1995 McCombs
5487775 January 30, 1996 LaCava et al.
5531807 July 2, 1996 McCombs
5565018 October 15, 1996 Baksh et al.
5578115 November 26, 1996 Cole
5593478 January 14, 1997 Hill et al.
5656066 August 12, 1997 Reiss et al.
5672195 September 30, 1997 Moreau et al.
5711787 January 27, 1998 Neill et al.
5730778 March 24, 1998 Hill et al.
5762686 June 9, 1998 Borzio
5772737 June 30, 1998 Andreani et al.
5814130 September 29, 1998 Lemcoff et al.
5814131 September 29, 1998 Lemcoff et al.
5820656 October 13, 1998 Lemcoff et al.
5827358 October 27, 1998 Kulish et al.
5858062 January 12, 1999 McCulloh et al.
5871564 February 16, 1999 McCombs
5891217 April 6, 1999 Lemcoff et al.
5893275 April 13, 1999 Henry
5893944 April 13, 1999 Dong
5906672 May 25, 1999 Michaels et al.
5917135 June 29, 1999 Michaels et al.
5928189 July 27, 1999 Phillips et al.
5931159 August 3, 1999 Suzuki et al.
5935297 August 10, 1999 Amlinger
5948142 September 7, 1999 Holmes et al.
5968236 October 19, 1999 Bassine
5979440 November 9, 1999 Honkonen et al.
5985001 November 16, 1999 Garrett et al.
5985113 November 16, 1999 Crome et al.
5988165 November 23, 1999 Richey, II et al.
5997611 December 7, 1999 Doong et al.
5997617 December 7, 1999 Czabala et al.
6010555 January 4, 2000 Smolarek et al.
6017315 January 25, 2000 Starr et al.
6030435 February 29, 2000 Monereau et al.
6033457 March 7, 2000 Lawless
6051050 April 18, 2000 Keefer et al.
6056804 May 2, 2000 Keefer et al.
6068680 May 30, 2000 Kulish et al.
6146447 November 14, 2000 Sircar et al.
6152134 November 28, 2000 Webber et al.
6162283 December 19, 2000 Conrad et al.
6171371 January 9, 2001 Derive et al.
6176897 January 23, 2001 Keefer
6212904 April 10, 2001 Arkharov et al.
6217635 April 17, 2001 Conrad et al.
6287366 September 11, 2001 Derive et al.
6290759 September 18, 2001 Fenner et al.
6302107 October 16, 2001 Richer, II et al.
6311719 November 6, 2001 Hill et al.
6314957 November 13, 2001 Boissin et al.
6344069 February 5, 2002 Smolarek et al.
6346139 February 12, 2002 Czabala
6372026 April 16, 2002 Takemasa et al.
6446630 September 10, 2002 Todd, Jr.
6457485 October 1, 2002 Hill et al.
6461410 October 8, 2002 Abe et al.
6471744 October 29, 2002 Hill
6478850 November 12, 2002 Warren
6478857 November 12, 2002 Czabala
6511526 January 28, 2003 Jagger et al.
6520176 February 18, 2003 Dubois et al.
6524370 February 25, 2003 Maheshwary et al.
6544318 April 8, 2003 Dee et al.
6547851 April 15, 2003 Warren
6551384 April 22, 2003 Ackley et al.
6629525 October 7, 2003 Hill et al.
6641644 November 4, 2003 Jagger et al.
6641645 November 4, 2003 Lee et al.
6651653 November 25, 2003 Honkonen et al.
6651658 November 25, 2003 Hill et al.
6681764 January 27, 2004 Honkonen et al.
6691702 February 17, 2004 Appel et al.
6698423 March 2, 2004 Honkonen et al.
6712087 March 30, 2004 Hill et al.
6712886 March 30, 2004 Kim
6764534 July 20, 2004 McCombs et al.
6793719 September 21, 2004 Kim et al.
6802889 October 12, 2004 Graham et al.
6805729 October 19, 2004 Lim et al.
6811590 November 2, 2004 Lee et al.
6824590 November 30, 2004 Dee et al.
6866041 March 15, 2005 Hardy, Jr. et al.
6866950 March 15, 2005 Connor et al.
6878186 April 12, 2005 Neary
6908503 June 21, 2005 McCombs et al.
6935460 August 30, 2005 McCombs et al.
6949133 September 27, 2005 McCombs et al.
6953498 October 11, 2005 Walker et al.
6959728 November 1, 2005 McCombs et al.
7011092 March 14, 2006 McCombs et al.
7025329 April 11, 2006 Winter
7066985 June 27, 2006 Deane et al.
7105038 September 12, 2006 Lee et al.
7135059 November 14, 2006 Deane et al.
7156903 January 2, 2007 McCombs
7171963 February 6, 2007 Jagger et al.
7279029 October 9, 2007 Occhialini et al.
7291271 November 6, 2007 Galbraith
7329304 February 12, 2008 Bliss et al.
7350521 April 1, 2008 Whitley et al.
7368005 May 6, 2008 Bliss et al.
7402193 July 22, 2008 Bliss et al.
7431032 October 7, 2008 Jagger et al.
7438745 October 21, 2008 Deane et al.
7445663 November 4, 2008 Hunter et al.
7455717 November 25, 2008 Sprinkle
7491040 February 17, 2009 McCombs et al.
7510601 March 31, 2009 Whitley et al.
7517385 April 14, 2009 Winter
7533872 May 19, 2009 Lee et al.
7585351 September 8, 2009 Deane et al.
7604004 October 20, 2009 Jagger et al.
7604005 October 20, 2009 Jagger et al.
7686870 March 30, 2010 Deane et al.
7708802 May 4, 2010 Deane et al.
7713421 May 11, 2010 Galbraith
7722698 May 25, 2010 Thompson et al.
7722700 May 25, 2010 Sprinkle
7730887 June 8, 2010 Deane et al.
7753996 July 13, 2010 Deane et al.
7758672 July 20, 2010 Lee et al.
7766010 August 3, 2010 Jagger et al.
7780768 August 24, 2010 Taylor et al.
7794522 September 14, 2010 Bliss et al.
7866315 January 11, 2011 Jagger et al.
20030005928 January 9, 2003 Appel et al.
20030167924 September 11, 2003 McCombs et al.
20040103894 June 3, 2004 Loncar
20050072426 April 7, 2005 Deane et al.
20060174871 August 10, 2006 Jagger et al.
20060174875 August 10, 2006 Jagger et al.
20060174877 August 10, 2006 Jagger et al.
20060174880 August 10, 2006 Jagger et al.
20060174881 August 10, 2006 Jagger et al.
20060283325 December 21, 2006 Sugano
20070056583 March 15, 2007 Jagger et al.
20070056584 March 15, 2007 Jagger et al.
20090065007 March 12, 2009 Wilkinson et al.
20110017216 January 27, 2011 Van Brunt et al.
Foreign Patent Documents
0368649 May 1990 EP
0760247 March 1997 EP
0860646 August 1998 EP
0873776 October 1998 EP
1125623 August 2001 EP
2174922 November 1986 GB
WO9857727 December 1998 WO
WO9858219 December 1998 WO
WO9943416 September 1999 WO
WO9943418 September 1999 WO
WO03092817 November 2003 WO
Other references
  • The Feb. 25, 2011 PCT International Search Report for the International application No. PCT/US2010/042636.
  • Recommendations of the Fifth Oxygen Consensus Conference, 1999.
  • “AirSep lowers boom”, www.hmenews.com/2004.12/depts/vendors/vendors1.htm.
  • Peter L Bliss, Robert W McCoy, Alexander B Adams, A Bench Study Comparison of Demand Oxygen Delivery Systems and Continuous Flow Oxygen, Respiratory Care, Aug. 1999, vol. 44. No. 8.
  • The Apr. 28, 2011 International Search Report for International application No. PCT/US2010/042631.
  • The European Search Report Mailed Feb. 1, 2013 for European Patent No. PCT/US2010042636.
  • The extended European Search Report mailed on Sep. 5, 2013 for European Application No. 10802789.
Patent History
Patent number: 8695600
Type: Grant
Filed: Jul 20, 2010
Date of Patent: Apr 15, 2014
Patent Publication Number: 20110017216
Assignee: Vbox, Incorporated (White Bear Lake, MN)
Inventors: Nicholas P. Van Brunt (White Bear Lake, MN), Theodore W. Jagger (White Bear Lake, MN), Perry B. Lonnes (White Bear Lake, MN), John A. Kivisto (Oak Grove, MN)
Primary Examiner: Jackie Ho
Assistant Examiner: Mark Wardas
Application Number: 12/839,979
Classifications
Current U.S. Class: Means For Removing Substance From Respiratory Gas (128/205.27)
International Classification: A61M 16/10 (20060101); A62B 7/10 (20060101);